Effects of row distance and nitrogen rate on canopy efficiency and yield of maize

Paper Details

Research Paper 01/01/2018
Views (463) Download (25)

Effects of row distance and nitrogen rate on canopy efficiency and yield of maize

Sabbir Ahmed, Momtaz Begum Shima, Nilufar Yasmin, Abu Mohammad Shahidul Alam, Mohammad Robiul Islam
Int. J. Biosci.12( 1), 126-135, January 2018.
Certificate: IJB 2018 [Generate Certificate]


Appropriate amount of nitrogen fertilizer and plant spacing are important agronomic practices to increase canopy efficiency and yield of maize. A field experiment was conducted at the Agronomy Experimental Field, Department of Agronomy and Agricultural Extension, University of Rajshahi, using a commonly cultivated hybrid maize variety (cv. ACI – 3110) during the period November 2015 to March 2016. The experiment consisted with three different row distances (S1, 85cm; S2, 75cm and S3, 65cm) and three nitrogen fertilizer (urea) rates (550 kg urea or 100% of conventional rate, 413 kg urea or 75% of conventional rate and 275 kg urea or 50% of conventional rate).The experiment was laid out in a split plot experimental design with three replications placing plant spacing in the main plots and nitrogen fertilizer in the sub plots. Except experimental treatments, standard agronomic practices were maintained for all plots. The results indicated that dense row distance (65 cm) can effectively increase canopy cover. At 60 days after sowing (DAS), maximum canopy cover (57.07%) was derived from 65cm row distance which was 7.06% and 8.65% higher than 75cm and 85cm row distance respectively. At 120 days after sowing, maximum canopy cover (82.04%) was also obtained from 65cm row distance and it was 14.63% and 36.12% higher than75cm and 85cm row distance respectively. Different yield components and yield (5.47 t/ha) was found highest with conventional fertilizer rate (550kg/ha). From our observation it can be suggested that 65 cm row spacing with 550 kg urea would be the best practice for maximizing canopy efficiency and maize productivity in the experimental area.


Ahmad N. 2000.Fertilizer scenario in Pakistan policies and development. Proceedings of the Conference on agriculture and Fertilizer Use. Planning and Development Division, Government of Pakistan, Feb. 15- 16, NFDC, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Akongwubel AO, Ewa UB, Prince A, Jude O, Martins A, Simon O, Nicholas O. 2012. Evaluation of Agronomic Performance of Maize (Zea mays L.) under Different Rates of Poultry Manure Application in an Ultisol of Obubra, Cross River State, Nigeria. International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry 2(4), 138-144. http://dx.doi.org/10.5923.j.ijaf.20120204.01.pdf

Amanullah HMJ, Nawab K, Ali A. 2007. Response of specific leaf area, leaf area index and ratio to plant density, rate and timing of N application. World Applied Science Journal 2(3), 235–243. http://www.idosi.org/wasj/wasj2(3)/13.pdf

Andrade FH, CalvinoP, Cirilo A, Barbieri P. 2003. Yield responses to narrow rows depend on increased radiation interception. Agronomy Journal 94(5), 975–980. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2002.0975

Andrade FH, Vega C, Uhart S, Cirilo A, Cantarero M, Valentinuz O. 1999. Kernel number determination in maize. Crop Science 39(2), 453– 459. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1999.0011183X0039000200026x

Anjum J I, Ali C N, Sahi F H, Khan ZH, Jafar M. 1992. Effect of plant population and fertilizer application on growth and yield of summer maize. Journal of Agricultural Research (Lahore) 30(4), 453-457.

Bertin P, Gallais A. 2000. Genetic variation for nitrogen use efficiency in a set of recombinant maize inbred lines. Maydica 45(1), 53-66. http://prodinra.inra.fr/record/57300

Casal JJ, Deregibus VA, Sa´ nchez RA. 1985. Variations in tiller dynamics and morphology in Lolium multiflorum Lam. vegetative and reproductive plants as affected by differences in red/far-red irradiation. Annals of Botany 56(4), 533–559. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aob.a087040

Charles A S, Charles SW. 2006. Corn response to nitrogen rate, row spacing, and plant density in Eastern Nebraska. Agronomy Journal 98, 529–535. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0137

Edwards JT, Purcell LC, Vories ED. 2005. Light interception and yield potential of short season maize hybrids in the Midsouth. Agronomy Journal 97, 225–234. https://pubag.nal.usda.gov/pubag/downloadPDF.xhtml?id=3777&content=PDF

Gaurkar SG, Bharad GM. 1998.Effect of plant population, detopping and nitrogen levels on growth and yield of maize. PKV Research Journal 22, 136-137.

Gehl RJ, Schmidt JP, Maddux LD, Gordon WB. 2005. Corn yield response to nitrogen rate and timing in sandy irrigated soils. Agronomy Journal 97, 1230–1238. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=

Hageman RH, Below FE. 1984. The role of nitrogen productivity of corn, 145-156 p. In: Proc. 39th. Annual Corn and Sorghum Research Conference, Chicago, IL, American Seed Trade Association, Washington, DC.

Lawrence JR, Ketterings QM, Cherney JH. 2008. Effect of nitrogen application on yield and quality of Silage Corn after Forage Legume-Grass. Agronomy Journal 100(1), 73-79. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2007.0071

Maddonni GA, Otegui ME. 2006. Intra-specific competition in maize: early establishment of hierarchies among plants affects final kernel set. Field Crops Research 85(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(03)00104-7

Mariga I K, Jonga M, Chivinge OA. 2000. The effect of timing of application of basal and topdressing fertilizers on maize yield at two rates of basal fertilizer. Crop Research (Hisar) 20(3), 372–380. www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20013006000

Modhej A, Naderi A, EmamY, Aynehband A, Normohamadi GH. 2008. Effects of post anthesis heat stress and nitrogen levels on grain yield in wheat (T. durum and T. aestivum) genotypes. International Journal of Plant Production 2(3), 257-267. http://dx.doi.org/10.22069/IJPP.2012.617

Muhammad D, Hussain A, Bhatti MB. 1990. Location differences in forage yield and quality of maize cultivars. Pakistan Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research 33, 454-456.

Mullan  DJ, Reynolds MP. 2010. Quantifying genetic effects of ground cover on soil water evaporation using digital imaging. Functional Plant Biology 37(8), 703-712. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/FP09277

Mungai NW, Macharia CN, Kamau AW. 1999. The effect of organic and inorganic phosphorus, and time of split application of nitrogen on maize in Kenya: In Proceedings of the sixth Eastern and Southern Africa Regional Maize Conference, Addis Ababa (Ethiopia).

Murphy SD, Yakubu Y, Weise SF, Swanton CJ. 1996. Effect of planting patterns and inter-row cultivation on competition between corn (Zea mays) and late emerging weeds. Weed Science 44, 865- 870.

Orkaido GM. 2004.Effect of plant population, detopping and nitrogen levels on growth and yield of maize. PKV Research Journal 22, 136-137.

Sabir MR. Ahmad I, Shahzad. 2007. Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on yield and quality of two hybrids of maize (Zea mays L.). Journal of Agricultural Research 4, 339-346. http://dx.doi.org/10.4172/2329-8863.1000207

Sangakkara SF, Bandaranayake PSRD, Gajanayake JN, Stamp P. 2004. Plant populations and yield of rain fed maize grown in wet and dry seasons of the tropics. Maydica 49, 83-88.

Sinclair TR, Horie T. 1989. Leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis and crop radiation use efficiency: A review. Crop Science 29, 90-98. http://dx.doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1989.0011183X002900010023x

Srikanth M, Mohamed AM, Mufhukrian P. 2009. Influence of plant population, irrigation and nitrogen levels on the growth of spring maize. Harayana Journal of Agronomy 13, 54-58.

Thanki JD, Patel PG, Thanki SD. 1988. Response of hybrid maize (Zea mays L.) to graded levels of nitrogen, phosphorus and potash in the summer season. Journal of Agricultural Research 14, 55-57.

Toler JE, Murdock EC, Stapleton GS, Wallace SU. 1999. Corn leaf orientation effects on light interception, intra-specific competition, and grain yields. Journal of Production Agriculture 12, 396–399. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/jpa1999.0396

Turgut I, Duman A, Bilgigli U, Acikgoz E. 2005. Alternate Row Spacing and Plant density Effects on Forage and Dry Matter. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 191(2), 146 – 151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-037X.2004.00146.x

Widdicombe WD, Thelen KD. 2002. Row width and plant density effects on corn grain production in the Northern Corn Belt. Agronomy Journal 94, 1020-1023. http://dx.doi.org/10.2134/agronj2002.1020